terça-feira, 24 de abril de 2012

Alternativa aos modelos educacionais vigentes

O curso de curta duração em Teatroeducação do GEPADEad busca investigar limites e possibilidades de alternativa ao modelo seriado de escolarização vigente. Trata-se de uma intervenção pedagógica voltada para o acompanhamento de grupo multi-idade congregando jovens, adultos e idosos interessados no manejo da linguagem teatral.

Prof. Dr. Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu



THINKING AT WORK: PLASTIC ASPECT OF ACTIVITY


 
THINKING AT WORK: PLASTIC ASPECT OF ACTIVITY

                                      Prof. Dr. Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu

 “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory…” (John I: 14, 1963, p. 96)

Acknowledgments
I may thank Professor Michael Cole and Lois Holzman, Marcio Perez and Fanny who helped me with the current english version of article.

Sociocultural-historical roots of Activity

People live embedded in an environment impregnated by different modes of communication which are not restricted to verbal discourse. Many means of mediation are used as vehicles to achieve human relational practices.

Among sign systems, alphabetical and numerical signs were once the key to knowledge of the origins of mind in society. It is reasonable to say that thinking mediated by signs, particularly through words and numbers, was connected to the need of communication among people in their collaborative efforts to meet the challenges of problems in the real world. They both had significant influence on human psychic activity and renewed it completely renewed in sociocultural-historical terms. (Leontiev, 1978; Luria, 1992; Vygotsky, 1987).

If humanity’s origins are reputed to be sociocultural and historical, it is not hard to imagine that a continuous improvement of tools used in work, along with new complex aspects of productive forces, took shape under economic and political constraints, and indeed contributed to empower psyche.

Instrumental use of the technology of communication and information (TCI) in human relational practices framed by work, combined with sign systems cognition scaffolding, gave rise to the mind in society thesis as an unhierarchical net of different kinds of meaning transporters, whatsoever overenriching and reshaping its activity in the fashion of its closest retort psyche-physiologic functioning: the cyberspace or digitized information network - an untouchable flood of interconnected sign systems - . (Gibson, 1984).

Activity According to Cultural Psychology

Relational practices at work as a convincing explanation of sociocultural mind is attributed to historical-dialectical materialism (Marx, 1975, 1976). Only under the Marxist doctrine on human consciousness was a general theory of mind in society as a forged sociocultural-historical way or thinking (internalization of social functions) once possible. According the Marxist assumption, human cultural joint activity makes possible a brand new qualitative psyche functioning. (Vygotsky & Luria, 1996).

The thesis of the origins of sociocultural psyche is absolutely linked to dialectical-materialism, as well as Vigotsky’s cultural-historical theory (CHT) of human development. Vigotsky himself asserted it in many papers, in which one can find several claims of scholars to join a collaborative enterprise in order to build a “Marxist” psychological science: socio-historical psychology (Bock, Furtado, & Gonçalves, 2001; Elhammoumi, 2006; Romanelli, 2011; Vygotsky, 1994,1996).

After Vigotsky’s untimelly death, his closest collaborators, Leontiev and Luria, undertook the task of advancing his work and submitting it to the doctrinal constraints of Marxism, creating so-called activity theory (AT) (Japiassu, 2007; Leontiev, 1983; Luria, 1994).

What makes activity theory/AT go far beyond cultural-historical theory/CHT boundaries on psychological studies is the first large focus on unpredictable plenty of senses negotiated along social relations designed by practice. In doing so, AT indeed extends Vigotsky’s initial queries, which were restricted to the role that verbal sign systems  play in psychological functioning (Luria, 1987; Zinchenco, 1998).

Leontiev and Luria introduced some of promising researchers of their time to traditional socio-historical psychology studies. Among them, there were Vasili Davidov (1988), Mario Golder (2002), Guillermo Blanck (Vygotsky, 2001) and Michael Cole (1998a). Michael Cole (personally directed by Luria) is the only one that still living, and is today a major manager of projects run under the sponsorship of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition/University of California in San Diego (www.lchc.ucsd.edu ).

Making good use of Marxist and Vigotsky beliefs, free of Marxist doctrinal constraints, Cole (1998a, p. 6) set out cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) as fundamental for cultural psychology: an attempt to unite AT and CHT and keep them welcoming and open to dialogue with other schools of understanding human psyche.  

Cultural psychology is described by Cole (1998a, p.104-105) as a comprehensive discipline that does not underestimate either naturalistic or cultural conceptions of human thinking and development. According to Cole, CP is an “uneclectic” sociocultural approach to psyche. For the good of the truth, cultural psychology is Cole’s honest answer to some attacks focusing on CHAT from intolerant defenders of  CHT and AT, who do not believe there is any possibility of reconciliation between these two theories or their use outside Marxism boundaries – despite the fact that both of these echoed Vigotsky’s initial researches and studies.

Cole’s cultural psychology is a convincing argument for socioculturalism (the Pan-American school of psychology that he proposed) and its theoretical support (CHAT). He argues there is no hidden “international conspiracy” to cut out the dialectical-materialist roots of cultural-historical theory. (Duarte Jr., 2001; Elhammoumi, 2009; Toomela&Valsiner, 2010)

Socioculturalism attempts to “clean out” CHT’s Marxist foundations sounds to me and others like an attempt to narrow down scholarly discussion into a boring school competition, in which case “neomarxist” thinkers demand “private property” rights on theories derived from dialectical-historical-materialism. This dispute would leed me to far from the goal of this paper, the focus on the impact of TCI on sociocultural mind, particularly on the plastic aspect of activity as thinking at work - a genuinely continuous relational and collaborative developmental process affected by sign systems linked into a network -.

It is relevant to note that neither Leontiev´s nor Luria’s accounts of activity ever asserted that Vigotsky denied that materialist-dialectical-historical approach is key to a genuine understand of the origins and development of sociocultural mind. Their statements show the relevance of the first results of Vigotsky’s studies in an honest criticism of “troika” members (the team of researchers under Vigotsky’s direction). They both admit the limits of their first studies, focusing just on the role taken by verbal systems within the collaborative building process of sociocultural mind.

Vigotsky himself explicitly admitted his personal dialectical-materialist-historical belief in the origins of human psyche in human relational and collaborative practical activity as anyone can observe by reading his courageous opposition to John’s (1963) biblical first line “In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1, p.95). Vigotsky emphatically said: “the word was not in the beginning – the action was there before that; the word is at the end of the development, it is the coronation of action” (Vygotsky, 1993, p. 131).

AT tries to understand how activity sets in physiological mechanisms using the plastic aspect of nerve connections, and stresses subjective senses as double mediation between persons and human artifacts as sociocultural and symbolic relational occasions (Leontiev, 1983).   

CHAT, in fact, promotes interchanges between “speech” or “symbolic” centered investigations of CHT (Luria, 1994, 1987) and “occupational” or “laborist” investigations of AT (Engenstrôm, 1990, 1987). In doing so, it stresses on  the interactionist (interactive) dynamics of meaning negotiations at several relational levels of human practical activity, mediated by sign systems and tools (Alvarez, del Rio, & Wertch, 1998).

Plastic Aspect of Activity

There is substantial agreement on the impact of sign systems on psyche activity, particularly on the fact that they reshape unmediated modes of human interactions between one another and the natural world. This undoubtedly improves them (Oliveira & Oliveira, 1999; Rego, 1995). Osório (1999) describes psyche empowerment by sign systems well well:

      By sign systems, human beings fit sense to the world, they raise thinking and are conceived by thought. Language is what makes it possible that people move between objective and abstract realities and relating past to present and future. Without language, human beings would stay forever attached to present without any possibility of reflection or any genuine understanding. (p. 177).

According to CHT, mind in society development is a process linked to the appropriation of social concepts by people, under educational interventions, through collaborative and intentional (conscious) use of word meanings. CHT asserts that verbal thinking is what gives rise to a sociocultural psyche. In such a perspective, only by it is possible for people to go ahead in present time feelings and impressions and break the boundaries of perceptual zone of “sensational objects sensibility” (Husserl, 2005).

AT, I have noted, insists on pointing upon the very importance of subjective (personal) meanings and the role of other sign systems over alphanumerical ones for psyche collaborative activity. It conceives labor practices and social interactions as a relational arena where overrun of meanings negotiation occurs. AT argues that verbal language cannot be taken as the exclusive carrier of meaning in social psyche functioning (Leontiev, 1983).

Cultural Psychology interactionist approach of mind in society as a cultural-historical relational and collaborative endeavor is what currently guides my point of view on mixed kinds of language and their impact over dynamic and development of psyche activity.

It is easy to see that mixed kinds of language in general use by TCI users are efficient ways to improve relationships within contemporary social practices and initiate new modes of psyche activity.

The cyber network paradigm helps us understand how many languages can be interwoven by simultaneously making sense actions using verbal and other sign systems (Bacalarski, 1994; Leontiev, 1983; Luria, 1987). Network is the key metaphor to open knowledge on plastic and flexible psyche activity.

According to Deleuse & Guatarri (1983), rizoma (plenty of unhierarchical and interconnected roots to refer to unpredictable, fast and dynamic make-meaning by simultaneous use of different kinds of sign systems) is the closest paradigm of psyche functioning. It refers the way of thought so-called complex or media thinking (Morin, 1990).

From a media thinking perspective, concepts are not available in any sequence or “stages” as they were supposed to be by Vigotsky and his TCH. Both social (scientific) and everyday (spontaneous) concepts, according to CP, should be understood as “nodes” of a make-meaning network without sharp boundaries between one another, like images made of pixels (small, untouchable, digital bright points used to compose visual representations on TV and PC screens). That is how CP conceives plastic, dialectical and flexible psyche dynamics and what justifies its claim for a critical review of a logic used by TCH to describe the process of appropriation of concepts by subject.

It is well-known that Vigotsky, Luria and Eisenstein (1990a, 1990b) worked hard together upon understanding how social concepts and metacognition developmental processes occur when psyche is under movie “writing” impact. They focused on what at that time they called “proto-language” (rudimental language) or “subjective speech” – a mixed kind of meaning-making that emerges through verbal and visual thinking, typical of audiovisual sense. Unfortunately, their investigations were brought to an end by Stalinist bureaucratic intolerance (Cabral, 2008; Valsiner & Veer, 1996). 

Before politics handcuffed his thinking, Eisenstein (1990b) asserted that movie “writing” is “a rebuilding of thinking process laws” (p. 102) and openly asserted that psyche activity, when flooded by extra-verbal sign systems, reveals “a curious kind of sensorial thinking that allows a genuine sensorial-emotional effect” (p. 124). Eisenstein himself (1990a) mentioned those “subversive” researches with Luria and Vigotsky, that focus on “sounds and sensations connecting one another and with emotions” (p. 91-92)

Digital media promotes abolition of traditional material supports used by sign systems representations (Berckeley, 2005). They become visible but not touchable because of bits - untouchable unity based on light-speed numbers combination (Calazans, 1997).

Technical development that makes possible the creation of virtual realities (VRs), sided by nerves alternative connections of psyche (Luria, 1991) led CHAT to fit media paradigm conception of plastic aspect of psyche activity.

Cognitive Diversity

CHAT uses the network or web metaphor to refer the plastic aspect of activity in parallel to subjective “double mediation” of AT and the role it takes on meaning negotiations within social relations and cultural interactionist practices (face to face or not, simultaneous or not, mediated by different sign systems).

It is easy to admit that “reading” and “writing” digital hypertexts affect psyche activity. More and more people make contemporary use of mixed sign systems to improve their social relations and collaborative practices mediated by TCI and cyberspace (Levy, 1999).

Extra-alphanumeric sign systems used within communicative processes between humans become current and their efficacy to increase interactionist and collaborative relational social meaning-making are undoubtedly real and related to each and every singular process of “double mediation” or subjective action. Primiano (1990) remarks about the strong impact of images over psyche activity where she says “they have generalized use and tend to be so hegemonic to the point that  some people assert they will replace the written word” (p. 206).

Undoubtedly, general use of TCI contributes to cognitive diversity and demands more research on mixed sign systems, “new-formations” (rudimental language), origins, and development, of as well as their impact on verbal sign system enriching by meaning-making possibilities (Lèvy, 1998; Santaela, 1983).

Fighting for cognitive diversity linked to TCI general use as much as to “double mediation” within collaborative relational human practices does not mean giving less importance to the alphanumeric sign systems on social mind constitution processes. On the contrary, it is a drive on verbal language empowerment by different sign systems and modes of knowing.  

Is it possible for a one to become a fluent TCI user without verbal literacy? That is what Gomez (2004) asks: “General computer use by people points to a return to verbal (speaking and writing) thinking. It is not possible to be a TCI competent user if one does not know how to make use of alphanumeric and other sign systems” (p. 59).

Cognitive and knowing diversity are usually described by contemporary studies as “natural” psyche activity (Gardner, 1994; Goleman, 1995). From CP’s point of view, people learn different cultural-historical modes of being and thinking and negotiate meanings within each and every relational social interaction, making use of personal “double mediation.” This kind of literacy permits efficiency using plenty of cultural artifacts and internalization of material world aspects as means of mediation (Cole, 1998b, p.163). 

Apprenticeship, from CP perspective, occur within negotiated and relational social interactions of meaning-making in which one effectively participant shares cultural artifacts that have been historically developed.

Interactionism or interaction has many meanings: (1) a particular route to access contents by friendly (intuitive) interfaces (screen touch technology used between humans and machines to give commands) as well as (2) subjects and ideas linked by a network of different mixed sign systems.

In addition to these two meanings, it can refer to (3) inter-relations between people with different expertise in making using tools and sign systems (cultural artifacts).

CHAT interactionism approach to human apprenticeship focuses on negotiated and relational meaning-making by people (double mediation) embedded into cultural-historical environments where they are engaged in varied collaborative endeavors.

Since CHAT, interactionist or socioculturalist perspective of every human apprenticeship presupposes collaborative meaning-making actions described as: (1) guided participation – based on explicit instructions of more fluent users of a community cultural toolkit and (2) participatory appropriation – knowledge obtainable from “imitation” of community elder members’ actions (Rogoff, 1988) or by singular “chaotic reaction” (Pavlov, 2005).

In place of these two categories developed by CP to refer diametrically sociocultural-historical modes of humans apprenticeship, I suggest a promising third category: (3) voluntary immersion – something like that intuitive, ludic and intentional acceptance of “consensual alienation” in order to pretend and “live” immaterial realities, typical of cyber RPG (role-playing games) or in the efficient use of mechanical body parts by mutilated people (Burdea & Coiffet, 1994).

Pedagogical Repercussion of Plastic Aspect of Psyche activity

Human relational environment within which everyday and extraordinary sociocultural practices occur have been traditionally understood by CP as a zone of proximal development (ZPD).

The ZPD is a metaphor used by Vigotsky (2001) to refer to the human cultural appropriation process, and is in general used by psychologists and teachers to estimate the distance between real and potential levels of solving problems. But the first intention of Vigotsky’s metaphor was the opposite of the hegemonic belief in the “static” measurement of people’s intelligence, as proposed by Binet&Simon: “The failure of these kinds of experimental researches is that they are based on an absolutely wrong idea of some general capacity of mind” (p. 297-306).

The hegemonic cognitive and modernist beliefs and its obsessive search for one’s abilities measurement had contaminated original meaning of the ZPD and can be easily found in several sociocultural studies focusing on its pragmatic use in school education. Such a narrow understanding of Vigosky’s metaphor had been reported by sociocultural researches that have a larger and more flexible conception of the ZDP, such as those undertaken by Holzman & Newman (2002, 2006).

Although an interactionist (interactive) approach to human apprenticeship has become very popular in educational studies focusing on cyber literacy and people school internet use, they have not been enough to promote a critical view of asymmetrical power relatinos of face-to-face, blended learning or e-learning practices over one’s psyche. On the contrary, they reinforce hegemonic “modeling” of the psychological and educational conceptions of “teaching” (Andrade&Vicari, 2003). 

Fast and easy understanding of the complex relations between learning and teaching are typical use of Vigotsky’s ZPD metaphor in educational use in a “ready-made opinion” or “prêt-à-porter” fashion. They had been used as a theoretical foundations for various “instructionist” proposals focusing on school education of different grades.

TCI meditational use in school education, in my opinion, should contribute to empower people’s critical thinking as well as different modes of being and knowing, particularly in consequence of contemporary network paradigm to refer to the plastic aspect of psyche activity.  

Ludic pretending, typical of electronic games, can be taken as of cyber culture soul. By pretending, people can live other lives and take different roles in play, putting their imaginative capability in motion. They can try other points of view and move from where they are by “consent hallucination” and “voluntary immersion” into imaginary scenarios such as occur in VR (virtual realities) at play (Baudrillard, 1991; Turkle, 1989).

Voluntary immersion is a promising way to understand cognitive psyche activity, because it puts in motion typical human subjective apprenticeship and demands fast and “intuitive” interactionist performance, guided by leading purposes of ZPD-specific design, like the so-called “directive occupation” school education planning for collaborative practices (Davidov, 1988).

This particular kind of cognition (voluntary immersion) can be easily found in general media thinking blender use. Ludic pretending demands alternative modes of knowing: people drive their attention to routes interruptions and to unpredictable tasks in “iconsphere” of cyberspace (Rushkoff, 1999; Tapscott, 1999).

So iconsphere refers the hypermedia environment of VRs (virtual realities) – a topological and non-Euclidian ruled relational space in which meaning-make presupposes putting side by side (intentionally or not) different kinds of meaning transporters  - most of them audio-visual ones. Knowing in “iconsphere” deserts teleological, serial and traditional paradigms of knowledge building.

It asks for subject relational engagement in meaning-making negotiation processes based on the use of multimedia aids like those that occur in film montage according to Eisenstein’s (1990a) conception: a very singular kind of speach.

This singular kind of symbolic writing fusion that puts sounds, words and images side by side does not use abstract concepts in a traditional, alphanumeric sign-system way. It presupposes a psyche metaphorical organization ability that is based on the urgent challenges of a sensitive world: the so-called cognitive patchwork or “intellectual bricolage”  (Levi-Strauss, 1976).

Knowledge and knowing by voluntary immersion in ludic pretending may be considered half-built and plastic, as it is performative: a continuous process of interchange negotiation meaning-making (Japiassu, 2010).

Interactivity and interconnection mediated by TCI reinforce and value cognitive diversity and a fast link between ideas and data. Voluntary immersion make it possible for one to do different tasks at the same time.

Plastic and unpredictable aspects of psyche activity, as consequence of the frequent use of TIC, scare teachers, psychologists and people who are not comfortable taking un-sequential conceptions of knowing, typical of meaning-making processes within ludic and improvisational pretending.

The assumption of roles and avatars sets an example of subjects’ radical refusal to submit to “static” and stigmatized ways of thinking and being. When “dressing” an avatar, one feels free to hold other points of view and perform as who he/she is becoming (Holzman & Newman, 2006). Avatars are “virtual personalities” that can be discharged at any time and therefore, are the key to enlarge our understandig of how people interact one another within cyber relational practices RVs (Assis & Prado, 2001).

Easing taking e-roles points to the provisory nature of meaning-making processes mediated by TCI as one is embedded in cyberspace and relates oneself to another with machines. It can be taken as a metaphor to demonstrate the contemporary psyche activity dynamic (Gomez, 2004).


Last Remarks

To admit psyche activity enrichment by the general use of TCI does not means to close one’s eyes on the risks of “ready-made” opinions over the Web and reinforcement of “idiot-savants” (information collectors and fluent users of machines) also named “fast thinkers”. It is necessary to keep in mind “unreasonable” dimensions of intuitive knowing processes (Ramal, 2003).

Ludic living of immaterial realities can give rise to two conceptions of apprenticeship through voluntary immersion: “blind look” (unconscious) and “critical look” (conscious). The second demands educational interventions to focus on ordinary thinking “aspects” or “meaning chains” deconstruction. In other words, educators engage people liberation from webs that oppress their subjective expression (Mrech, 1999).

Human-friendly machine interfaces and mechanical body parts in general use points to a closer relationship between human subjective and machines: a particular and curious way of being and thinking called cyborg thought by some scholars (Alves & Nova, 2003). Mixed human and machine actions demand a new conception of being: “machine-falasser” human (Lacan, 1982).

One’s voluntary immersion into imaginary iconsphere world demand no doubt instant satisfaction of desires and leaves behind traditional cognition ways of knowing. It puts in motion intuitive thinking and makes the verbal negotiation process fragile by urgent and affective discharges at the most in automatic and unreasonable fashion. 

There are a few researches that focus on the impact over emotional and cognitive life of people who interact for a long time into the cyberspace and how iconsphere literacy empowers psyche activity.  However, there is too much speculations. It causes stress, intolerance to the long-run verbal negotiation processes (spoken or written) on parallel to its worth when faster and higher automatic performances are required or engagements in tasks that demand patchwork thinking.

Results of researches on this issue using the CP approach have not been available. I think  it is reasonable to promote and support rigorous investigations on the plastic aspect of activity, particularly on the extension of general contemporary use of media thinking to empower human psyche.

    Studies that focus on these questions would be useful to psychologists and educators (particularly from a cultural-historical psychology perspective) and could help people better understand their ways of being and thinking and interacting when subjected to school literacy. (Rego, 2002, p. 73)




References

ALVAREZ, A.; PABLO, del R.; WERTSH, J. (1998) Estudos socioculturais  da mente. Porto  
       Alegre: Artmed.

ALVES, L. & NOVA, C. (2003) Estação online: a “ciberescrita”, as imagens  e a EAD. In
      SILVA, M. (Org.) Educação online – teorias, práticas, legislação, formação corporativa
       (pp. 105-134). São Paulo: Loyola

ANDRADE, A. & VICARI, R. (2003). Construindo um ambiente de aprendizagem a   
      distância inspirado na concepção sociointeracionista de Vygotsky. In SILVA, M. (Org.).
     Educação online – teorias, práticas, legislação, formação corporativa (pp.  255-272). São
     Paulo: Loyola.
ASSIS, J. & PRADO, G. (2003) Dois experimentos recentes em ambientes virtuais
      multiusuário: Imateriais 99 e Desertesejo. Recuperado em 30 de março de 2003, da
     UNICAMP(GTcompos2001):

BACALARSKI, M. (1994). Vygotsky’s developmental theories and the
     adulthood of computer mediated communication: a comparison and an illumination.
     In International Conference L. S. Vygotsky and the contempoaray human sciences.
     Moscow: IPRAS-DPRAE-PIRAE-CPP ( http://psych.hanover.edu )

BAUDRILLARD, J. (1991). Simulacros e simulações. Lisboa: Relógio D'Água.

BERKELEY, G. (2005). Tratado sobre os princípios do conhecimento humano. In
     Berkeley. São Paulo: Nova Cultural, p. 5-89.

BÍBLIA SAGRADA. (1963). O Evangelho segundo João I. In Novo Testamento. Rio de
     Janeiro: SBB, p. 95-120.

BOCK, A., FURTADO, O. & GONÇALVES, M. (Orgs.). (2001). Psicologia sócio-
     histórica – uma perspectiva crítica em psicologia. São Paulo: Cortez.

BURDEA, G. & COIFFET, P. (1994). Virtual reality technology. S.L: John
     Wiley&Sons.

CABRAL, M. (2008). Eisenstein e a psicologia da arte. Dissertação de mestrado,
     Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina,
     Santa Catarina.

CALAZANS, F. (1997). Da midiologia da arte à realidade virtual. In ArteUnesp (pp.
      201-210). São Paulo: Editora Unesp, 13.

COLE, M. (1998a). Cultural Psychology - a once and future discipline.
     Cambridge-Mass., London-England: Harward Univesity Press.

COLE, M. (1998b). Psicologia Sócio-Histórico-Cultural: algumas considerações
      gerais e uma proposta de um novo tipo de metodologia genético-cultural. In
     ALVAREZ, A.; del R., & WERTSCH, J. Estudos socioculturais da mente (pp.
     161-183). Porto Alegre: Artmed.

DAVIDOV, V. (1988). La enseñanza escolar y el desarrollo psiquico – Investigación
     psicológica teórica y esperimental. Moscu: Progreso.

DELEUZE, G. &  GUATARRI, F. (1983). Rizoma: introducción. México: Premia.

DISCONZI, R. (1999). Pintura Pós-TV: uma reflexão sobre o meio eletrônico. In
      YAZIGI, L. & YOSHIURA, J. (Orgs.). Criatividade uma busca interdisciplinar
      (pp.138-143). São Paulo: UNESP.

DUARTE Jr., N. (2001). Vigotski e o aprender a aprender – crítica às apropriações
      neoliberais e pós-modernas da teoria vigotskiana. Campinas: Autores Associados.

EISENSTEIN, S. (1990a). O sentido do filme. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.

EISENSTEIN, S. (1990b). A forma do filme. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.

ELHAMMOUMI, M. (2006). Is there a marxist psychology?. In ELHAMMOUMI, M.,
     DUARTE, N. & SAWSHUCK, P. (Eds.). Critical Perspectives on Activity –
     Explorations across Education, Work and Everyday life (pp. 23-34). USA:
     Cambridge.

ELHAMMOUMI, M. (2009). Vygotsky’s Scientific Psychology: Terra incognita. In
     Revista de Psicologia Russa Sócio-Histórica, disponível em cópia pdf gentilmente  
     cedida com permissão do autor via e-mail.

ENGESTRÕN, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Oy.

ENGESTRÕN, Y. (1990). Learning, working and imagining. Helsinki: Oy.

GARDNER, H. (1994). Estruturas da mente – a teoria das inteligências múltiplas.
     Porto Alegre: Artmed.

GIBSON, W. (1984). Neromancer. New York: Ace.

GOLEMAN, D. (1995). Inteligência emocional – a teoria revolucionária que redefine o
     que é ser inteligente. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva.

GOMEZ, M. (2004). Educação em Rede – uma visão emancipadora. São Paulo: Cortez.

GOLDER, M. (2002) Angustia por la utopia. Buenos Ayres: Ateneo Vigotskiano de la
     Argentina.

HOLZMAN, L. & NEWMAN, F. (2002). Lev Vygotsky – cientista revolucionário. São
      Paulo: Loyola.

HOLZMAN, L. & NEWMAN, F. (2006). Unscientific Psychology – a cultural-
     performatory approach to understanding human life. New York, IUniverse-East
    Side Institute.

HUSSERL, E. (2005). Investigações lógicas – sexta investigação – elementos e uma
      elucidação fenomenológica do conhecimento. In Husserl (pp. 26-30). São Paulo:
      Nova Cultural.

JAPIASSU, R. (2007). A linguagem teatral na escola: pesquisa, docência e prática  
     pedagógica. Campinas: Papirus.

JAPIASSU, R. (2010). Metodologia do ensino de teatro. Campinas: Papirus.

LACAN, J. (1982). Mais, ainda. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.

LEONTIEV, A. (1983). Actividad, conciencia, personalidad. Ciudad de La Habana:
     Puelblo y Educacion.

LEONTIEV, A. (1978). O desenvolvimento do psiquismo. Lisboa: Horizonte.

LÈVY, P. (1999). Cibercultura. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. 34.

LÈVY, P. (1998). A ideografia dinâmica - rumo a uma imaginação artificial? São
     Paulo: Edições Loyola.

LÉVI-STRAUSS, C. (1976). O pensamento selvagem. São Paulo: Nacional.

LURIA, A. (1987). Pensamento e linguagem – as últimas conferências de Luria.Porto Alegre: Artmed.

LURIA, A. (1991). Curso de psicologia geral.  Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira.

LURIA, A. (1992). A construção da mente. São Paulo: Ícone.

LURIA, A. (1994). Desenvolvimento cognitivo. São Paulo: Ìcone.

MARX, K. (1975). A ideologia alemã. Lisboa: Sociales.

MARX, K. (1976). O Capital. Lisboa: Sociales.

MORIN, E. (1990). Introdução ao pensamento complexo. Lisboa: Instituto Piaget.

MRECH, L. (1999). Psicanálise e Educação – Novos operadores de leitura. São Paulo:
     Pioneira.

OLIVEIRA, M. & OLIVEIRA, M. (Orgs.). (1999). Investigações cognitivas: conceitos,
      linguagem e cultura. Porto Alegre: Artmed.

OSÓRIO, V. (1999). Tradução intersemiótica: um espaço de criação. In YAZIGI, L. &
    YOSHIURA, E. (Orgs.). Criatividade uma busca interdisciplinar (pp. 176-180). São
    Paulo: UNESP.

PAVLOV, I. (2005). Textos Escolhidos. São Paulo: Nova Cultural.

PRIMIANO, D. (1999) A ilustração – recurso e reforço de texto. In YAZIGI, L. & 
YOSHIURA, E. (Orgs.). Criatividade uma busca interdisciplinar (pp. 199-206).
      São Paulo: UNESP.

RAMAL, A. (2003). Educação com tecnologias digitais: uma revolução epistemológica
     em mãos do desenho instrucional. In SILVA, M.  (Org.). Educação online – teorias,
      práticas, legislação, formação corporativa (pp. 183-198). São Paulo: Loyola.

REGO, T. (1995). Vygotsky – uma perspectiva histórico-cultural da educação.
     Petrópolis: Vozes.

REGO, T. (2002). Configurações sociais e singularidades: o impacto da escola na
     constituição de sujeitos. In KOHL, M., TRENTO, D. & REGO, T. (Orgs.). 
     Psicologia, Educação e as temáticas da vida contemporânea (pp. 47-76). São Paulo:
     Moderna.

ROGOFF, B. (1998). Observando a atividade sociocultural em três planos: apropriação
     participatória, participação guiada e aprendizado. In ALVAREZ, A., del R.,
     WERTSH, J. Estudos socioculturais da mente (pp. 123-142). Porto Alegre: Artmed.

ROMANELLI, N. (2011). Individuação e escolarização de crianças de 0 a 5 anos:
     um cenário dinâmico no palco da abordagem histórico-cultural. Dissertação de
     mestrado, Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.

RUSHKOFF, D. (1999). Um jogo chamado futuro - Como a cultura dos garotos pode
     nos ensinar a sobreviver na era do caos. Rio de Janeiro: Revan.

SANTAELLA, L. (1983). O que é semiótica. Editora Brasiliense: São Paulo.

TAPSCOTT, D. (1999). Geração Digital - A crescente e irreversível ascensão da
      Geração Net. São Paulo: Makron Books do Brasil.

TOOMELA, A. & VALSINER, J. (Eds.). (2010). Methodological thinking in
     Psychology: 60 ages gone astray. USA: Infoagepub

TURKLE, S. (1997). A vida no ecrã – a identidade na era da Internet. Lisboa: Relógio
     D’água.

TURKLE, S. (1989). O segundo EU – os computadores e o espírito humano. Lisboa:
    Presença.

VALSINER, J. & VEER, R. (1996). Vygotsky uma síntese. São Paulo: Loyola.

VUIGOTSKIJ, L. (1987). História del desarrollo de las funciones psíquicas superiores.
     Ciudad de La Habana: Editorial Cientifico-Técnica.

VYGOTSKY, L. (1993). Pensamento e linguagem. São Paulo, Martins Fontes.

VYGOTSKY, L. (1994). A formação Social da mente: o desenvolvimento dos
     processos psicológicos superiores. São Paulo, Martins Fontes.

VYGOTSKY, L. (1996). Teoria e método em psicologia. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

VYGOTSKY, L. & LURIA, A. (1996). Estudos sobre a história do comportamento: o
    macaco, o primitivo e a criança. Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas.

VYGOTSKY, L. (2001). Psicologia pedagógica Edição Comentada por Guillermo
      Blanck. Porto Alegre: Artmed.

ZINCHENCO, V. (1998). A psicologia histórico-cultural e a teoria psicológica da
     atividade: retrospectos e prospectos. In ALVAREZ, A., del R., WERTSCH, J.
     (Orgs.) Estudos socioculturais da mente (pp. 41-55). Porto Alegre: Artmed.